The point is that you do recieve care and quite often 'cash' paying clients pay a smaller bill.

They bill you in good faith more or less 'hoping' that you will pay your debt.

They also follow up as The Frau's "adult" daughter found out. The kid thought that because she did not have insurance that she could just go to the ER and "forget" to pay the bill. :nope:

She has to appear in court later this month where she will most likely have her future wages garnished to pay for her ER bill. :up:

So yeah, the hospitals are going after people who don't pay their bills.. and good for them. There is no more "hope they will pay" They are going after the non-payers. :up:

But in the case of an illegal ailen the phrase "Blood from a stone" comes to mind.

People bleeding to death in the street is a better alternative?

Now how do you get here from there?

I was saying that care is given with the 'hope' that they will be payed, as opposed to turning them away and letting them bleed to death in the street.

Honestly :nope:

that is a real good point.

It is easy to type real tough on an internet forum. But will the American people have the stomach to see people literally dying in the gutter. Not locked away where they can die without upsetting little Junior or Sally, but right there in the street.

Or walking past lines of people begging for money to be able to buy the medication for their children or spouse.

That is what will happen if this country adopts the attitude of "if you can't afford healthcare tough". People won't suddenly stop getting sick/injured. :nope: The result will be sick and injured people not getting medical care.

What will happen if a father has a very sick child and can't afford health care.... and he has a gun? What would you do if your daughter was dying and you could not afford health care and the country was telling you "hey father, we can't care for your dying daughter but we are sure you recognize that it is better for everyone else if your daughter dies."? I bet many of us would do "anything" to save our daughter/son.

What would be the cost to our society then?

I don't know what the solution is. I don't know if the proposed health plans are the solution either. But I am confident that the solution is not "no cash, no medical care". There has to be a better way than just letting people die in the gutter. I hope we have come a long way from the 19th century in this.

I think that the healthcare should be offered to people who need it, and If you dont need it, then you keep you current plan or keep your current plan if you want, this is america, we should have a choice.

so people who have health care (ex there job provides it.)

Yeah?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Li...d_Factbook.png

Ah, but it's only pricey if you actually fork over the $$$

Otherwise, it amounts to the same thing as "No insurance? Oh well, I guess you don't have to pay! See ya!"

Unless things have changed and they can garnish your wages to pay for it. Can they?

Maybe but this discussion will go a lot smoother if you don't start calling people idiots. You know there are people waiting to throw that right back and raise the ante.

Sure they can garnish after getting a court judgement ... but someone needs a job with an actual paycheck to get their pay docked.

They can and will send the collection agencies after you, that's for sure.

Hmm...then things have changed, I took some renters to court a few years back, won the case, paid the $30 for a judgment and that was the end of it. There was no way to make them pay their debt owed.

But again, collection agencies, judgements, probably don't have much of an impact.

Evil hospitals :stare:

.

For a change, see how the internal American civil war II about Obama's health care plans is perceived from some other civilised places in the West. To us, it looks like a dirty war both by regional politicians and republicans in general in order to damage the president - no matter the cost, and - pure hysteria. This German article describes the impression it leaves with us over here. It's a mud-throwing like I have not seen any since longer time. Again: not so much the reform is the trigger, but attacking it is only a tool - a tool to do maximum damage to Obama for the sake of damaging Obama.

http://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/a...yes#reqdrucken

The American democracy, despite it's obvious flaws in design that after WWII more and more got exploited and sold the nation to lobbyism and an economic elite hijacking it alltogether, nevertheless once was one of only few examples in the world that was admired by people in all the world for it's political culture and inner mechanisms - and all in all it was rightfully admired, becasue after adding all the positves and negatives in the end a relatively high ammount of justice was achieved. But what is happening there now in destroying the presidency at no matter a cost for the political culture, and with all mean and dirty tools available - that is not that once admired example people looked up to. This it is not.

I'd say you're correct with your analysis.

I can't read german - but I get the gist of what your saying on here. The key here is that this isn't just Obama - this is more Reid and Pelosi actually - the President is just the voice pushing - they are the power pushing.

Whats amazing is that you indicate that "the politics of personal destruction" is new for American politics. Its not - not by a long shot.

Pretty much refer back to Reagan. From that time forward, there has been some type of personal destruction attempts. Bush senior escaped a major one, mainly because the Dems failed to bring down Reagan with Iran/Contra. That was the first big push. Then you had the Reps trying the same with Clinton over Lewinsky and real estate deals. Then the Dems tried again with Bush using the war, 9/11 whacko theories, etc.

Honestly, there has not been a push to attack Obama to bring him down, what has occured has been simply a debate over what this country needs regarding health care. Just because the majority of media wants to make it about their annointed one instead of that fact that MOST voters oppose this plan, is just another example of how the majority of media is a willing tool of the left.